The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

, however, for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant B (Definite and misunderstanding of legal principles) 1) The accusation filed by Defendant D, the former spouse of Defendant A, does not include the contents of the instant indictment concerning the adultery as of March 6, 2010 among the instant indictment. Thus, the indictment against this part is unlawful. 2) Since the complainant knew of the Defendants’ interfinite communication, and then, when the complainant knew of the interfinite communication between the Defendant A and the complainants, he exchanges different conversations from either husband and wifes before and after the complaint, and the complainant was living together after the complaint was filed, and the complainant was given a day-to-day dialogue through the Internet. As such, the complainant may be deemed to have expressed his intent not to hold the Defendant liable for interfiniteing acts with the intent to continue a matrimonial relationship with the Defendant A, the indictment of this case is unlawful.

3) The judgment of the court below which found the Defendants guilty of all the facts charged in this case, even though the Defendants did not have any doubt, is erroneous and adversely affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts. B. The judgment of the court below against the Defendants by the prosecutor (six months of imprisonment) is deemed to be too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. On March 6, 2010, Defendant B’s assertion 1) In the accusation of multiple offenses, the crime of multiple offenses should be specified. However, the specific degree can only be determined by specifying a specific criminal fact by which the complainant’s intent is sought, and it is necessary to specify the criminal facts in detail by stating the date, time, place, method, etc. of the crime directly. Since the crime of multiple offenses is nothing more than anything else, even if the complainant could not know the specific criminal facts even before he/she confessions his/her own criminal facts, it is common that it is impossible to identify the contents of the crime.